This section is based almost entirely upon the RCTS Great Northern
locomotive history which reflects upon G.F. Bird's earlier
study and contains much material from it. The GNR was fortunate in having
four outstanding engineers: Sturrock, Stirling, Ivatt and Gresley, and locomotive
development evolved in a fairly straightforward progression. Prior to Sturrock's
appointment there was a period of uncertainty when locomotive affairs were
in the hands of Benjamin Cubitt and Edward Bury. In addition the line was
still being constructed. A further problem is that the work of the different
engineers tended to merge: thus, Gresley was responsible for further
modifications to Stirling designs even after the Grouping.

These were ordered on 11 December 1846, following a visit by Bejamin
Cubitt to Bury, Curtis & Kennedy in Liverpool and to William Fairbairn
of Manchester: six locomotives were ordered from each firm and were delivered
in 1848/9: Nos. 121-6 were from Bury and 127-32 from Fairbairn. They were
typical Bury locomotives, but differed slightly depending upon supplier.
They were similar to the initial locomotives suplied
to the London & Birmingham Railway under Bury. They had 15in x 24in
cylinders. They were painted dark green. The first six were lent to Peto
& Betts to assist in the construction of the railway. Most of the Bury
type were rebuilt under Sturrock as 0-4-2ST. The exception was No. 124 which
may have been rebuilt as as 0-4-2ST before being renewed in 1868 by Stirling
as an 0-6-0ST with the same number. Bird stated that the Fairbairn locomotives
were rebuilt as 0-4-2Ts, but this is questionned by Groves.
Groves pp 36-8 and Figs. 25/6 (drawings from Bird)
show locomotives as built. Figure 27 (drawing) shows 0-4-2ST.

Bury's prototype 2-4-0

This was supplied in by Bury, Curtis & Kennedy 1849 and was given
the number 66, but was soon renumbered as No. 100. It was a typical Bury
product with bar frames, 15in x 20in cylinders and a total heating surface
of 944ft2. Following a derailment (due to a crank axle failure
Brown V. 1 p. 76) in 1856 it emerged from Doncaster
with extra outside plate frames and Hawthorn's compensating levers, new boiler
and new cylinders (16 x 22in.). It was further reconstructed under Stirling
in 1864 and 1875 and lasted until 1898. finally in the Sleaford area.
Groves 1: 38-40. Figures 28 and 29 (drawings) show
locomotive in original condition and as rebuilt under Sturrock.

"The earliest locomotives ordered for the Great Northern Railway were
of standard types by well-known makers of the time". According to Groves
(but not Brown) the GNR always seemed to spell Sharp with a terminal "e":
Sharpe. The relative lateness of the GNR's entry into the market gave it
an advantage in that standrad designs had been evolved and improved. Order
No. 198 of 5 February 1847 covered six locomotives, and a further 44 were
covered by Order No. 203 of 4 March 1847. These were taken into stock
between 1847 and 1850. They were small: 15 x 20inch cylinders;
10.5ft2 grate area; total heating surface of 748.2 ft2;
5ft 6in driving wheels and 90 psi boiler pressure. Sturrock fitted compensating
levers which assisted them to run on relatively poor and light track. Initially
these were used on the Lincolnshire lines: Louth to New Holland on 1 March
1848, including the East Lincolnshire Railway from Boston to Grimsby. Groves
Figures 1 and 2 show them in original condition (photographs at Grantham
station in 1854). Groves: pp17-27..

Sharp 2-2-2T

Sharp 2-2-2s were converted to tank engines from December 1851 (at
Boston), in some cases with virtually no modification to frames, but partly
as a consequence of accidents (it is not really clear whether some frames
were modified before the accidents dictated policy). Furthermore, frames
were lengthened, and then lengthened still further to accommodate a water
tank and coal bunker, and radial axleboxes were fitted on the rear axle.
The footplate crews called them "tailwaggers". The redundant tenders were
used on Hawthorne and Wilson 0-6-0s, and for the initial auxiliary steam
tenders. The 2-2-2Ts were used on semi-fast trains between Boston, Lincoln
and Grimsby, but later moved to rural branches.

Accidents invloved No. 29 on the up 21.10 Sheffield to Retford Mail
on 8 September 1852 which derailed on Dore House embankment on the MSLR killing
the driver and the guard. Captain Douglas Galton noted that the frames had
not been extended and that there was no side play. Tests were arranged with
No. 32 (a "precisely similar engine") on 17 September and it was found to
be steady at 50 mile/h. Galton advised that the weight distribution should
be modified. The 2-2-2Ts worked in the London area and were capable of running
from King's Cross to Hatfield in 24 minutes. There was a further serious
accident on 3 July 1866 when the 10.20 Hitchine to Cambridge train derailed
at Littlington level crossing killing the driver and fireman. This led Captain
Tyler to state that tank engines were not as safe as tender engines. At this
point in the text Groves notes that the footplate crews called them "Boxers".
The locomotives were further modified under Stirling.

Sharp 0-4-2 tender rebuilds.Twelve original: 3, 14, 16, 23, 25, 27, 30, 36, 44, 47. Some of the
work was after Stirling's succession. Worked between Boston, Sleaford and
Lincoln. Bird incorrectly stated that worked between Leeds and Wakefield.
Groves pp. 24-5.

Stirling rebuilds2-2-2T Nos. 10, 28 and 29 were converted to 0-4-2Ts in late 1866 and
may have been intended for London suburban work. Most of the Sharp locomotives
were withdrawn during the 1870s, but five, Nos. 10, 12, 20, 42 and 43 were
renovated for working light branch lines, and the last of these locomotives
(No. 43) lasted until 1896. In ther case of No. 12 it was renovated at Doncaster
with new frames, cylinders and a straightback boiler. Groves pp. 25-7.

"Small Hawthorn" 2-2-2 singlesOrdered by Benjamin Cubitt in October 1848 and in October 1850. They
were ordered at the same time as the 0-4-2 goods engines. Works numbers 685-90
(GNR 51-6) had originally been intended for the Glasgow, Dumfries & Carlisle
Railway and were fitted with Gooch's valve gear activating "vertical valves"
and was probably specified by the original customer. Works Numbers 654-9
formed GNR 57-62 were delivered in 1849, but WN 660-7 (GNR 63-70) incorporated
improvements to the boiler, following GWR practice and improved crank axles.
Dampers were fitted to the ashpans. The cylinders were larger (15½ in)
diameter. This was the prelude to a still larger design, but this was not
constructed. Groves pp. 28-33

RebuildingSturrock rebuilt some locomotives with 16in cylinders and extended
wheelbases: 54 in 1861; 52/9 in 1862 and 51 in 1865. Stirling rebuilt Nos.
60/2/9 in 1867 with straighback boilers and "all over" cabs (GSWR type).
The livery was Brunswick green, but light green later. Nos. 52-7 were loaned
by the GNR to the LCDR in 1860 for working the Strood to Beckenham extension.
They acquired the nickname "Geordies". Groves pp.
29-30. H.T.B. (Loco. Mag.,
1901, 6, 20).stated that Nos. 51-60 modified by moving the leading
axle forward to be under smokebox, and weatherboards fitted.

Nos. 67 and 70Rebuilt as 0-4-2s in 1879 with new frames, cylinders and 4ft straightback
boilers. Later cylinders enlarged to 17in and then to 18in. Lasted until
1900/1901. No. 70 was included incorrectly in class E5. Groves pp.
32-3.

Hawthorn 0-4-2 Goods.Ordered by Cubitt as "luggage engines". Delivered in 1848/9. WN
633/635-47672. Running Nos. 101-115. Not entirely successful on entering
service: problems with inadequate trussing of the frames and slack bearings.
Spare wheels had to be supplied. The cylinder size was reduced to 15½in.
Number 110 was fitted with condensing apparatus for working on the Metropolitan
Railway in August 1863. Figs. 20 and 21: drawings: original condition: Fig.
21 No. 110 as modified with condensing apparatus. Groves pp. 33-6..

Number 111 1863 (0-6-0ST)5ft 0in coupled wheels 17 x 24in cylinders; sole Hawthorn rebuild.
Groves pp. 34-6.Stirling fitted new 16in cylinders and new
boilers from 1866, and the locomotives were reboilered again in the early
1880s. The last was not withdrawn until 1899. Figs. 22-24 as rebuilt by Stirling:
Fig. 24 No. 112A fitted with Westinghouse brake on 3 June 1902 (not finally
withdrawn until August 1904).

116 Class 5ft 0in 0-6-0 goodsOrdered at same time as 71 class 2-4-0 type: i.e. under Bury, but
delivered under Sturrock who required larger fireboxes. Fifteen were supplied
by Wilson (144-58) and fifteen by Hawthorn (116-20/134-43) and these were
delivered in 1850/1. An extra locomotive was supplied by Wilson in 1851 and
it became No. 167. The products from the two manufacturers differed quite
significantly: The Hawthorn firebox and tube areas were 69 and 823 ft2, whilst
the E.B. Wilson were 78 and 815 ft2 respectively. Eight of the class were
hired to the Metropolitan Railway from 10 October 1863. They were reboilered
under Sturrock between 1864 and 1866. No. 116 was fitted with a steel boiler
and a taper firebox as an experiment in late 1864. Groves pp. 41-5.

0-6-0ST conversions from December 1863According to Groves 1 pp.
43-5: No. 113 was converted in April 1863. Nos. 117 and
144 also received new boilers. Nos. 143, 139, 140 and 149 in 1865. Nos. 153
and 155 in 1866. Figs 34 No. 139A in 1890; No. 134 c1887 (photographs)

Boiler explosionsNo. 138 whilst on Metropolitan Railway at Bishop's Road on 9 May 1864.
Captain Tyler stated that due to grooving of boiler
(see also Hewison). No. 155 suffered a
boiler explosion at Nottingham on 1 January 1866. Following this Sturrock
lowered the boiler pressure of the class to 100psi. The class was withdrawn
between 1871 and 1898.

"Jenny Lind" type (2-2-2)E.B. Wilson lent the GNR two as samples and these were thoroughly
tried on heavy traffic in 1851 before being acquired and numbered as 201
and 202. They had an unusual and very short blast pipe and were fitted with
the venacontracta ash clearance system. Groves states that they were amongst
the most reliable express passenger singles on the system. Stirling rebuilt
the two locomotives moving the leading wheels forward and fitting his GSWR-style
cabs. Eventually straightback boilers were fitted. No. 201 suffered a crank
axle failure at South Elmsall whilst working an up express on 12 April 1872.
Groves (1) pp 45-7: Figs. 36 (original) and 37 (as rebuilt by Stirling in
1867).

Acquired engines

Contractors locomotives acquired Peto & Betts, contractors for the Loop Line (Peterborough to
Gainsborough), sold their Nos. 1 and 2 (supplied Tayleur in 1847) and 4 and
6 (B. Hick, 1847) to the GNR where they became 133; 159; 160 and 161. They
were 2-4-0 type, but rebuilt at Doncaster as 0-4-2 type in 1855, in which
state No. 160 was not withdrawn until 1897. Fig. 38: No. 133 (G.F. Bird drawing);
Fig. 39 No. 161 (as fitted condensing apparatus: drawing); Fig. 40: 160A
with Stirling boiler (G.F. Bird drawing). Groves 1 pp.
47-8

Two passenger engines purchased by Sturrock Groves 1 pp 50-1: On 22 November 1853 Charles Cave Williams, the
contractor working the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway (whose
Locomotive Superintendent was David Joy) offered the GNR two E.B. Wison 0-6-0s
and these became GNR 368/9 and formed part of the 308
class. At the same time two 2-4-0s were offered with 5ft 6in coupled
wheels and 16½in x 22in cylinders: these were purchased for £3000
each. These were similar to OWWR Nos. 21-6 which became GWR Nos. 182-7 and
are covered in Locomotives of the Great
Western Railway Part 3 on page C24. These had large boilers. J.V.
Gooch, Locomotive Superintendent of the ECR on his report on the OWWR locomotives
ated that these were "unnecessarily large and heavy, and would be found expensive
to work, as well as injurious to the permanent way". They became GNR 216-217.
They were fitted with thicker tyres which increased the driving wheel size
to 5ft 9in and with Stirling straightback boilers. There was an accident
to No. 216 on 2 April 1862 at Algarkirk when the Mail was derailed due to
spreading of the track. Fig 41 No. 216 (G.F. Bird drawing)

71 Class 2-4-0sOriginally ordered by Bury as Bury-type with bar frames, but modified
to meet Sturrock's requirements. Nos. 71-5 supplied by Hawthorn (Works Numbers
729-733) and E.B. Wilson (Nos. 76-90). 16in x 22in cylinders; coupled wheels
6ft; grate area 13.2ft2 and total heating surface 904ft2. Groves
argues that boiler pressure was probably 120psi, not the 150psi quoted by
Bird who was prbably influenced by Sturrock's rewriting of history. Most
reboilered between 1864 and 1867 and majority withdrawn between 1869 and
1874, leaving only four in service (78, 79, 87 and 88). These were reboilered
with Stirling straightback boilers and were not withdrawn until the 1890s.
The class was used mainly on secondary passenger work. Figs 42 and 43 are
reproductions of G.F. Bird drawings of Wilson No. 76 and Hawthorn No. 71.
Fig. 44 is a photograph of No. 79 as rebuilt by Stirling. Grove 1 pp.51-4.
See also 223 class.

Intermediate crankshaft (Crampton patent)
locomotivesGroves entitles this section (pp. 54-5) Crampton locomotives and
this is confusing as these were not typical Cramptons, but were intermediate
crankshaft (or dummy crankshaft) locomotives for which Crampton held patents.
Groves 55-9 describes how Longridge supplied ten locomotives in 1851/2 which
Lowe described as 4-2-0s. Fig. 45 shows No. 91 in original condition (Bird
drawing), Fig. 46 shows No. 200 as 2-4-0 (drawing), Fig. 47 shows No. 91
as 2-2-2 (drawing) and Fig. 48 (a Bird drawing) shows No. 99 as 2-2-2 in
final condition with Stirling boiler. These were given GNR Nos. 91-9 and
200 and Crampton was paid £50 per locomotive in royalties. They were
not successful and were rebuilt as conventional 2-2-2s whilst retaining the
original boilers. In 1865 Nos 93, 94, 97 and 98 received new boilers and
Stirling continued this process. One of the "Cramptons" opened the King's
Cross to York service by the direct route. But in their original form they
could not cope with gradients of the new mainline due to lack of adhesion..
No. 200 ran ass a 2-4-0 using extra driving wheels in place of the crank
axle, but slipping was still a problem. The 2-2-2 conversion involved new
frames and the conversion was completed in 1853/4. The boiler of No. 98 exploded
on 14 January 1865 whilst it was on test at Peterborough and this led to
staff fatalities. The class was fitted with Stirling boilers and was still
active in the 1880s.

Quote from Groves (p. 59)Before proceeding, it may be as well to give some space to the motive
behind the once well-known legend regarding the ten Cramptons - if only to
illustrate how history may sometimes be perverted to suit one's whims and
fancies. Archibald Sturrock was undeniably a good locomotive engineer, but
because the initial engines advocated by him for the G.N.R. were originally
unsuccessful, evidence points to the fact that for prestige reasons - which
were quite unnecessary on his part - Sturrock preferred firstly to disown
them, then verbally attempt to eliminate them; and finally even deny their
existence!

Just before the turn of the century, when G.F. Bird was compiling
his G.N.R. locomotive account, some information he was seeking regarding
the earlier engines was, as Bird phrased it, "derived indirectly from that
doyen of locomotive superintendents, Mr. Archibald Sturrock himself."
Unfortunately, even during his long retirement, Sturrock retained little
affection for the original Cramptons and therefore implied to Bird that they
were ordered prior to his assumption of office. Later came another inference
that" he "did his best to countermand the order", none of which is evident,
and in later years hardly due to forgetfulness. Sturrock appeared still capable
of memorising early events even in his 86th year of age, which is borne out
in his letter to The Locomotive of 16th May, 1903, concerning some
trivia about details of a brass coal scuttle of which he well remembered
possessing since 1846!

The final elimination was attempted when Sturrock wrote to E.L. Ahrons
claiming that "there was only one Crampton on the Great Northern, the others
being of my own design." The acceptance of the claim by an historian of Ahrons
calibre, convinced most locomotive students and confused many others. But
in the above it will be seen how the legend gradually built up over a long
period of years, and the reason motivating it.

It may be of interest to note that at the King's Cross Centenary
Exhibition held in October 1952, the original G.N. Stock book revealed that
a contract was placed with Longridge on 4th December, 1850 for ten passenger
engines, with tenders, at £1,600 each. The entry "Crampton's Patent"
appears and the running numbers are given as '91-99, 200' entered later in
ink, confirming all ten were taken into Stock.

2-2-2.

"Large Hawthorn" 2-2-2 singles 1852/3
Groves (1 pp60-5):"In historical retrospect, these engines certainly
appear as good examples of the locomotive practice of their period. Moreover,
they were spoken of as fine machines at the peak of their career, having
a liberal heating surface and a boiler pressure capable of adjustment up
to 150 lb. per sq. in. enabling them to put up sustained performances. In
1867-68, Stirling thoroughly rebuilt ten engines with his straightback boilers
and cut-away cabs, thereby greatly extending their period of general
usefulness."

As their running numbers were latterly required for new Stirling 2-4-0's,
four engines were placed on the Duplicate list, becoming Nos. 204A in 1888,
208A in 1881, 209A in 1884 and 214A in 1889. Withdrawals of the class began
in 1869 and the last rebuilt engine survived until 1892. Large Hawthorns
were used on Manchester Flyers which run between London and Manchester in
5 hr 20 min and this was reduced to 5 hr in response to LNWR
accelerations.

Cites Michael Reynolds' Engine driving life: or the stirring adventures
and incidents in the lives of locomotive engine-drivers (Ottley
4042) which notes incident of No. 210 crashing through a MSLR freight
train on the Retford crossing (although Groves records no official confirmation
of this incidemt).

Sturrock's 4-2-2 No. 215 Groves 65-8 (see also BT)The Whyte notation is not successful at describing some early locomotives
with a relatively rigid wheelbase. Many authorities refer to this locomotive
as a bogie single and these include Sekon (pp. 171-3 including Fig.
57), Ahrons p97 (including Figure 108 where a bogie appears to be shown)
and Groves who argues that the locomotive ran both as a rigid vehicle and
with a bogie: interestingly Groves Figure 71 claims to show No. 215 before
its conversion to bogie form, and this figure is obviously identical to Sekon's
Figure 57! (except that the reproduction in Groves is clearer). Sekon also
claimed the direct assistance of Sturrock (and there is a contribution in
The Engineer in 1888 on this locomotive by Sturrock).

The aim of this locomotive was to run 100 miles at 60/65 mile/h. The
Board agreed to a proposal to build an experimental locomotive on 27 July
1852 and Hawthorn received an order to build a locomotive which was completed
on 31 July 1853. It cost £3500 (more than estimated). It had flangeless
driving wheels and had Hawthorn's patent percolated steam-collecting pipe.
Cylinders: 17½in x 24in. The midfeather firebox was 155.2ft2
and the total heatin surface 1719. Boiler pressure 120 psi. It was a a standard
gauge version of the Gooch broad gauge 4-2-2s. The Sturrock contribution
in The Engineer claimed that the locomotive would have been capable of reaching
Ediburgh in 8 hours; was teh precursor of the Stiling 8ft singles. Groves
was clearly unaware of the dangers associated with Clement E. Stretton and
states that "true facts were made known by Clement E. Stretton who emphatically
pointedv out that No. 215 "ran upon eight wheels, four in a group, but not
in a bogie". In September 1853 the four front wheels were derailed on a
crossover. The locomotive was subject to much test running. It was withdrawn
in October 1869.

168 Class 5' 0" 0-6-0sE.B. Wilson Works Numbers 267-318 of 1851/2 became GNR 168-197. W.
Fairbairn of 1852/3 became GNR 198-9/300-307. Originally both Wilson
and Fairbairn were each to supply twenty, but troubles affecting Fairbairn
caused this to be reduced to ten and Wilson provided the balance. There were
slight differences between the two types. Figures 54-7 show the locomotives
in their original conditions. Fig. 55 is a drawing of the Fairbairn type.
Fig. 54 a drawing of the Wilson type and 56/7 early photographs of the Wilson
type (c1866 and 1865: No. 177 in Hitchin yard). Figures 58-61 show the Stirling
rebuilds. Groves (1) pp. 69-70Hopwood photograph: Rly
Arch., 2008 (18) 34.

308 Class 5' 3" 0-6-0s In April 1851 tenders were received from Wilson, Sharp, Hawthorn,
Stephenson, Nasmyth and Kitson for twenty locomotives: Stephenson and Nasmyth
were successful and each supplied ten (Stephenson: 308 to 317 and Nasmyth
318-327). There were slight variations in the dimensions of the two lots.
Groves (1) pp. 70-1.Later 308 Class 5' 3" 0-6-0sThese were ordered to meet the needs of increasing coal traffic into
London. Groves (1) pp. 71-3 noted the following entering traffic between
1853 and 1855:

(a) via C.C. Williams of the Oxford,
Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway: similar locomotives were supplied
to the OWWR: Nos. 27-30 and 34 which became GWR 248-52. They had 16in x 24in
cylinders, 15 ft2 grate area and 1299.20
ft2 total heating surface and 140 psi boiler pressure.
From 1864 many fitted with taper grate fireboxes for use with steam
tenders.

Nottingham & Grantham Railway G80-4Incorporated as Ambergate, Nottingham and Boston & Eastern Junction
Railway on 16 July 1846. Both MR and LNWR were interested in acquiring it.
Opened from MR at Colwick to Grantham on 15 July 1850. An agreement with
the GNR enabled the GNR to work the line from 2 April 1855. Prior to this
line had been worked under contract by E.B. Wilson with David Joy as locomotive
foreman: thus Joy's Diaries are an important source:
see August 1850 and details
of Grantham. There
were six locomotives in March 1853, but this had grown to nine when they
were numbered. The following Table is taken from Groves vol 1 pp 80-4.
Brown Great Northern locomotive engineers V.1
notes that the Wilson "0-4-0"s were what he termed "lay" or dummy crankshaft
locomotives (and he would have got this information from Joy's
Diaries).

Powers obtained 30 June 1852 and lines opened from 1 August 1854 which
gave GNR access to Bradford and to Halfax (via LYR) whilst LYR acquired access
to Leeds. In 1864 the GNR reached Bradford Exchange. The following table
shows the locomotives absorbed into GNR stock from July 1863.

LBHJR

GNR

Wheel

Maker

WN

Date

1

162

0-4-2T

Kitson

690

12/1858

2

395

0-4-2T

Kitson

691

12/1858

3

396

0-4-2T

Kitson

692

12/1858

4

397

0-6-0PT

Kitson

794

9/1860

5

398

0-6-0PT

Kitson

795

10/1860

6

399

0-6-0

Hudswell Clarke

14

3/1863

Fig. 78 confirms that Numbers 4 and 5 were indeed pannier tank engines,
although former Numbers 1 to 5 were all converted into 0-6-0s for working
on their original territory, but from 1866 were converted into 0-6-0STs for
the King's Cross area and eleswhere.

West Yorkshire RailwayRailway taken over by GNR in 1865. Groves called this an "obscure
line", but its original title of Bradford, Wakefield & Leeds Railway
described its ambitions fairly well: that is to serve the heavy woollen area
around Dewsbury. The lines were steeply graded and the presence of two singles
was perhaps surprising.

1. Acquired from builders at low cost as unsold stock2. Possibly last locomotive manufactured by
Charles Todd3. Acquired via Mr Edwin Turner, one of
Wilson's
trustees.4. This locomotive was probably worn out at the time of the takeover.
Walker of Bury was licensed
to manufacture Sharp type singles, but others have stated that this may have
been a Bury type, possibly ELR No. 10 Diomed:
see East Lancashire Railway.5 Bird states WN 250. Also some suggestion may have been named
Marquis.6. Bird stated WN 2517. Lent by Manning Wardle and on return sold to T. Nelson of Casleton
[sic] & Grosmont Railway and named Earl Carlisle.

First series (241-50)Slaughter Gruning (became Avonside late 1865). The first series are
often cited as well tanks, but back tanks would be correct designation. Sekon
(Evolution p. 216) asserts that these locomotives were for working the Great
Northern trains over the Metropolitan Railway. 16 x 22in cylinders; 5ft 6in
coupled wheels; Grate area 12.5 ft2; total heating surface 854
ft2. 150 psi boiler pressure. coke capacity 15 cwt Groves notes
that they were none too steady at the rear end. Sturrock wrote in The
Engineer (5 January 1866) that the Adams radial axleboxes "answer admirably,
both at high and low speeds; the engine running with perfect steadiness at
above fifty miles an hour"

270 series Groves 96 et seq.The 270 series had a 12 in longer wheelbase
and heavier framing. Nearly 4 tons heavier than 241 series. This series consisted
of well tanks. Both series were known as Metro tanks. Originally designed
to burn coke; in late 1869 burnt Welsh anthracite, and in 1874 coke again.
Nos. 270-4 supplied Neilson 1867. Main dimensions: 16½ x 22in cylinders;
5ft 6½in coupled wheels; Grate area 13.6 ft2; total heating
surface 874.75ft2; 160 psi boiler pressure.. Royston
accident July 1866: Captain Tyler criticised use of tank engines on passenger
trains.

Stirling rebuilding: 1878-1881Fitted with straightback boilers and Ramsbottom safety valves. 241
series were fitted with longer frames and the compensating levers were removed.
Liveries: originally Brunswick green, Stirling post 1880 bright green; mid-1880s
black lined red for London area, later still bright green

When 270 series appeared in early 1867 they joined 241-50 at King's
Cross where they performed well, were slightly less unsteady at rear end
and were noted for their high acceleration. Until 1879 used on London suburban
services, after which sent elsewhere, including West Riding. In May 1882
complaint from Chief Civil Engineer concerning rail damage on Derbyshire
Extension line where speeds of 60 mile/h demanded which led to rail damage.
Ahrons noted oscillation in trains.

This is a complex issue on several levels:
(1) the lack of success of the system is generally associated with Sturrock's
premature retirement;
(2) the relative complexity of the system which involved complex pipe work
and runs of 23 feet (with live steam) and condensing;
(3) orders for locomotives; special tenders; conversions of existing locomotives
and tenders and
(4) eventual conversion of tenders to locomotives.

The initial modification involved the redundant tender from Sharp
single No. 46 which was fitted with inside cylinders and coupling rods. This
was coupled to 0-6-0 No. 391. Another redundant tender was modified and fitted
to MSLR 0-6-0 No. 124.

The MSLR ordered six steam tenders from Neilson for their locomotives
Nos. 194-9,

Three ex-Nottingham & Grantham Railway 0-6-0s (Nos. 391-4) were
modified with enlarged fireboxes, modified feed water pumps capable of handling
hot water and 23ft long pipes from the boiler to the tender. The last had
five bends to make them flexible. The steam was condensed in a tubular condenser
on the bottom of the tender tank. The locomotives were run between Peterborogh
and London and over the Lincolnshire Loop via Boston.

Groves (p. 106) lists the orders placed: Nos.
400-9 were ordered from Kitson and Nos. 410-19 were ordered from Hawthorn
with steam tenders.
Further locomotives were ordered: locomotives only (i.e. without tenders):
420-9 (Neilson)
430-9 (Kitson); with ordinary tenders:
440-9 (Neilson),
450-5 (Vulcan), ordered with steam tenders, but steam tenders cancelled:
456-60 (Avonside)
461-9 (Hawthorn) See also Six-coupled goods engines, Great Northern
Railway. Loco. Rly Carr. Wagon Rev., 1925, 31, 79 for No. 465
as supplied by Hawthorn without steam tender.
Many of the locomottives, as rebuilt by Stirling, lasted long enough to be
classified as J2 or J3 (mainly the latter) in the 1900 classification.

Between 27 March and 27 October 1866 comparitive tests were made between
five locomotives with auxiliary tenders, and five without: the former consumed
30,035 cwt of coal and 3901 pints of oil in hauling 12368 wagons over 52815
miles, whilst the latter consumed 20284 cwt of coal and 2041 pints of oil
in hauling 10566 wagons over 46053 miles.

Fig. 101 Kitson 0-6-0 coupled to steam tender is the only illustration
in Groves (and according to hime one of only two Works photographs) of a
steam tender in original condition. Fig. 85 (p. 218) in Sekon is a different
photograph. Sekon mentionms the steam tenders in his text on p. 217

Locomotive, 1909, July, p. 127

Reminiscences of a retired fireman who stated that the footplate crews
hated them and attempted to sabotage them. The footplate was very hot and
uncomfortable, hot big ends were common on the tenders and condensing was
unreliable. Further anecdotes in The Engineer (but where?)

Drawings of tender. The Engineer, 1919, 5 May (repro
Vernon)

Rly Gaz., 1920, 27 August (repro Vernon)

Groves 1 pp73-4: Bennett personally
remembered auxiliary steam tenders in use very well. With their engines they
practically formed four-cylinder locomotives with two groups of six-coupled
wheels, and as such had not many predecessors. They sometimes did very good
work under competent and careful drivers, but were unsuccessful on the whole,
chiefly because the heating surface provided was insufficient for the duplex
engines when the load was such as to make a really severe call on the capacity
of the machines. When no such demand was necessary, and especially when the
engine was running light, the additional friction due to the extra motors
and gearing was a positive disadvantage. This led drivers habitually to open
both regulators, even when shunting. On such occasions it at least looked
awkward to see two sets of six-coupled wheels and two exhausts engaged in
giving a flying tip to a few, maybe only one or two trucks, and also engines
running light with all cylinders working.

Besides removing steam tender equipment, Stirling rebuilt the majority
of Sturrock 0-6-0's with new boilers and plate frames. Including the earlier
116 class, a total of 154 Sturrock goods tender engines came under Stirling's
jurisdiction. Seven of the thirtyone 116 class were dealt with. Particulars
of rebuilding by Stirling are noted below.

Amongst miscellaneous 0-6-0's reboilered by Stirling were Nos. 165
(purchased in 1850) and 391/4 (exNottingham & Grantham) which have been
noted in their respective class sections.

Sturrock's steam tenders. Tony Vernon. Backtrack, 19,
85-9.Notes his patent [113 published 6 May 1863 not submitted] and also
Fairlie's [1210 13 May 1864 which Dewhurst described as the master patent]
which also sought to increase the adhsion available. Sturrock's innovation
is described in detail (drawings from The Engineer 9 May 1919 and
Railway Gazette 27 August 1920) and also quotes estimates of the financial
savings which Sturrock hoped to achieve. Charles Sacré, at that time
Locomotive Superintendent of the MSLR, was also involved in the assessment
of the steam tenders where initial tests indicated that 50% increased loads
could be hauled up Clarborough and Kirton banks. Eventually the MSLR ordered
six steam tenders as part of an order for twelve locomotives from Neilson's.
Some fifty steam tenders were ordered by the GNR and Vernon estimates that
the value of the orders (placed with more than one builder) was equal to
about two years of his salary in terms of Royalties. The article attempts
to rationalize the reasons for Sturrock's premature retirement. Certainly,
the failure to find a system to reward the enginemen for the increase in
their productivity was a major factor in the failure of the system. Patrick
Stirling's eventual attack (quoted at length) on the system is understandable:
he was an engineer who demanded simplicity [and this may have influenced
the GNR's Board when it selected him]. Sturrock had got on well with the
GNR Chairman Dension, but his replacement Col. Packe was a different sort
of executive. The article notes that the needs of Sturrock's three motherless
children, his substantial income from his second wife's estate and his
rural life style meant that the problems of locomotive engineering were no
longer worth pursuing. The article also notes that Sturrock was retained
as a consultant to the GNR for three months, thus implying an immicable
separation. Some of the steam tenders remained in use until 1868. The article
notes that it was Gresley who supplied the information on the steam tenders
to The Engineer (Gresley at that time was considering the booster
as a similar means of increasing locomotive productivity.
See letter in Issue 4 on page 253 from
Brian Orrell on correspondence between W. Gooch of Vulcan Foundry and
Sturrock and to Patrick Stirling at a date prior to his official appointment
(that is in June 1866). A return to this material will be made once the GNR
page on the website is developed.

2-4-0

Sturrock 251 Class 6ft 0in 2-4-0sTen supplied by Sharp. Stewart in 1866 (GNR Nos. 251-60): double frames,
16½ x 22 cylinders; 22.7 ft2 grate area (with a cross-partition
(midfeather) for coal burning); 150 psi. Worked in West Riding from Doncaster
to Leeds and Bradford. Gradually fitted with Stirling boilers and with vacuum
brakes. Last withdrawn in October 1902, by which time known as class E5.
G116-18. Illustration by Hopwood: No. 258 at Hitchin on 5 July 1902 in
Rly Arch., 2008 (18)
33.

Sturrock 264 Class (built as 2-4-0s)Orders were placed before Sturrock's departure for six 2-4-0 locomotives:
three from John Fowler (WN 747-9) given GNR Nos. 264-6 and three from Yorkshire
Engine Co. (WN 1-3), GNR 267-9). Brown (p. 134) notes that these 2-4-0s were
the first locomotives to be sold by the Yorkshire Engine Co. These were delivered
in 1866/7. They were intended to combine the advantages of steel wheels on
steel rails, but problems in design and construction led to their conversion
to 2-2-2s by Stirling between 1873 and 1878. According to Groves the design
problem was identified by J.C. Park (who was at Doncaster when the type was
delivered): the cylinders had a 24 inch stroke, but the outside cranks had
a 14 inch radius throw. Furthermore, at that time Bessemer steel tended to
be brittle. Stirling rebuilt them between 1873 and 1878 as 2-2-2s with new
boilers, following which they were restored to first-classs work. Latterly,
they were used on secondary duties: the last was withdrawn in May 1902. There
is some evidence according to Groves that the 2-4-0s may have run as 2-2-2s
before being rebuilt. In 1878 Nos. 265 and 266 were fitted with Westinghouse
brake for trials between Doncaster and Peterborough via Lincoln. Three
locomotives lasted long enough to be classified as B6. Groves 1:
pp.119-22

Sturrock designs

2-4-0

1868-

Built by John Fowler and Yorkshire Engine Co. (Ahrons). Double frames,
17in x 24in cylinders, 7ft coupled wheels, long wheel base (9ft 7in + 8ft
6in). Steel axles and tyres. Ahrons (168) states that type was not very
successful and were rebuilt as 2-2-2 by Stirling.

0-4-2T

The exact classification of this type is elusive: Ahrons (p. 155)
states back tank: Doncaster stated well tank. Ahrons noted that these
incorporated W.B. Adams' radial axles, outside bearings and sandwich frames.
Fifteen were built by Avonside and five by Neilson. The cylinders were
16½in x 22 in. The coupled wheels were 5ft 6in, and the trailing wheels:
4ft. Fourteen similar locomotives were supplied by Neilson to the LCDR. Ahroins
stated that they were excellent engines and performed a vast amount of hard
work for many years. The one imperfection was oscillation at the trailing
end which could be transferred to the train.

As with the section on Sturrock the primary source is
Groves (Volume 2), but the material is re-arranged
to reflect the style adopted elsewhere, especially for railways incorporated
into the LNER: that is tender before tank: six-coupled, before four-coupled,
etc. Pages 209-20 of Brown note J. Ramsbottom's "short printed report" to
the GNR Board of August 1878 which comments upon the reduction in coal
consumption achieved between 1866 and 1877, and the need for greater workshop
accommodation.

171 series Groves (2) pp. 227-8 note that type shared the general appearance
of 24 inch locomotives except for deeper wheel splashers and slightly modified
cabs. 38 were built at Doncaster 1873-81. Bird erroneously includes Nos.
171 and 193 with J7 class and No. 372 is listed as first J7. Bird's
Fig. 63 fails to show coupling rod splashers.

716 series Groves (2) page 229: Dübs built 20 and Vulcan built 15 at £2275
each during 1882 and Doncaster built a further ten from the same drawings
in 1886. Ivatt fitted No. 743 with Marshall's valve gear in 1901.

1031 series Groves (2) pages 229-31: Dübs built fifteen in 1891: fitted with
wash-out plugs. Groves (2) p. 232: comencing with No. 743 in May 1897 125
class J6 locomotives rebuilt with 4ft 5in diameter boilers and reclassified
as class J5 (most fitted with domed boilers, but 18 fitted with large
straightback boilers. Remaining J6 withdrawn between 1903 and 1920. Nos.
320, 742 and 795 sold to J.F. Wake of Darlington and possibly No. 742 sold
on to the Saeton Delaval Coal Co. in 1921 to become their No. 11 and eventualy
Hartley Main Collieries Number 20.

315 seriesGroves (2) pages 234-6 record ten built Doncaster in 1898 and 35 at
Dübs in 1898/9

343 seriesGroves (2) page 236: Doncaster built 40 between 1899-1900; Kitson
constructed 25 in 1900; Dübs built 13 in 1901, whilst another twelve
of this series were diverted to M&GNJR. No. 1144 of this series was unique
in carrying straightback boiler between 1907 and 1914: only Ivatt engine
to change from domed to domeless boiler

Rebuilds to class J5 (LNER class J4)Groves (2) pages 236-9: ten straightbacked 4ft 5in boilers built under
Ivatt and fitted to Nos. 743, 737, 796, 724, 748, 328, 321, 848 between 1897
and 1899. Of these: Nos. 321 and 737 withdrawn in 1919/1920: remainder
eventually received domed boilers. Ten J6 received secondhand 4ft 5in
straightback boilers within period 1907-1919, but of these only No. 324,
383 and 1039 subsequently received domed boilers, remainder of these withdrawn
1916-21. Popst-grouping an LNER version of the boiler was developed with
Ross pop safety valves set at 175 psi.

Rebuilds to class J4 (LNER J3) Groves (2) 239 et seq note that in May 1912 No. 1163 was rebuilt
under Gresley with 4ft 8in boiler and this became protype for GNR J3. 71
were converted to the new form by the Grouping and 82 by the LNER. The grate
area was 16.14 ft2, subsequently 16.25ft2

Those built between 1874-9 retained their volute springs above the
trailing axles. Some locomotives were fitted with helical in place of plate
springs.

World War 1Groves (2) pages 240-1 record that in 1916 26 locomotives were modified
for ROD service with condensing gear, feed pumps and water lifting apparatus.
All carried Doncaster works plates, even when the locomomtives concerned
had been built by outside manufacturers. All returned in 1919/20.

TendersGroves (2) pp 242-3: many were fitted with secondhand Sturrock tenders,
although in many case these were rebuilt to bring them more up to date

Liveries: Brunswick green, then black from 1882 to early 1890s, light green,
until Gresley grey from 1912 onwards.

Allocations and work: Groves (2) pages 244-54. Mostly used for routine
freight work: a few equipped for passenger work. During WW1 seven were lent
to LSWR and were overhauled at Eastleigh (Groves (2) page 247). During the
summer West Riding locomotives were used on excursions to Scarborough,
Bridlington and Cleethorpes, and in the London area ran excursions for Southend
as far as Victoria Park where GER motive power took over.

1021 series4ft 5in boiler ten 1896 straightback boiler later fitted with domed.
A few rebuilt with 4ft 8in boilers by LNER. Survivors from both series became
LNER J7 (RCTS Locomotives of the LNER. Part 5.)

From 1905 Ivatt fitted Nos. 374 and 1024 with domed boilers and between
1911 and 1922 five of the 374 series and seven of the 1021 series were so-fitted.
Three locomotives were fitted with secondhand 4ft 2½in straightback
boilers. Livery was green until 1912, Gresley grey thereafter. Last withdrawn
between 1927 and 1936.

Stirling introduced this type in 1867/8. The class nominally had 6ft
6in coupled wheels, although the tabulated data quotes 6ft 7in for the earlier
series; 6ft 7½ for 751 on and 6ft 8½in for the Ivatt 1061 series.
Boiler pressure increased from an initial 130 psi to 170 psi in the later
locomotives. The grate area remained unchanged, but the boiler design evolved
during the period of construction and subsequent rebuilding. Groves (2) pp.
14-43.

a. refitted and removed June 1904b. see Fig. 26 for Taylor's cinder box.Only Taylor's device removed sparks, if the engine could still be
worked hard: all devices greatly inhibited steaming. The Drummond devices
were supplied via the Glasgow Engineering Co. A drawing dated 25 May 1909
shows a device based on asbestos rope in the smokebox. No. 1064 was fitted
at King's Cross with a patented device by E.R. Notter and in 1911 No. 752
was fitted another device which aimed to cool the sparks. E2 No. 202 and
E1 No. 209 were fitted with a McIntosh device in 1909.

1897 No. 21 was reboilered with a domed boiler and a total of four
was modified in this way, but eight retained straightback boilers until
withdrawn.
No. 55 was fitted with the simple vacuum brake and participated in the Newark
brake trials of 1875.
Nos. 6 and 41 (latter Ivatt rebuild) equipped with Wynford Brierley (patented)
signalling apparatus installed on Grantham to Lincoln line from 8 September
1897 and inspected by Lt. Col. Yorke on 12 October 1898. Figures 38 and 39
show modified locomotives. (G2 51-2)
Nos. 996 and 997 were lent to the MGNJR in 1895 and worked from Norwich City
shed.
In 1913 the SECR borrowed fifteen E1 class. B was added to the numbers of
204, 206 and 820. The last was returned in 1915. The tenders were lettered
SECR. Fig. 29 No. 1067 at Ramsgate Town on 23 May 1914.
The 34 locomotives handed over to the LNER are described in
RCTS Locomotives of the LNER. Part
4. Illustrations include a Nottingham to Grantham express hauled by No.
715 in 1919 and No. 718 at Tutbury on a Stafford to Derby train in
1924.

Covered by Groves 2: pp59-62. Used wheels from Sturrock 4-2-2 No.
215. Brown states: "A Great Northern legend relates that sometime during
1869 Stirling and Shotton were examining locomotives lined-up at Doncaster
for scrapping, when they came upon the Sturrock 4-2-2 No. 215. After agreeing
that this engine should be withdrawn, Stirling is said to have remarked to
Shotton: 'John, we can't scrap those beautiful wheels.' This legend is probably
true, for we now know that Stirling had to inspect all vehicles before scrapping.
But much more important is the fact that 'those beautiful wheels' had been
made at Hawthorn's while Stirling was their Works Manager and, almost certainly,
under his personal supervision.

Stirling now took the opportunity to build a 'one off' job around
the 7 ft. 6 in. driving wheels from No. 215. Although generally similar to
his 2-2-2 engines of 1868, this new engine, also a 2-2-2, carried a slightly
longer boiler and slightly larger cylinders to propel its bigger driving
wheels. Numbered 92, it was provided with a boiler 10 ft. 6 in. long by 3
ft. 10½ in. diameter and with cylinders of I7½ in. diameter by
24 in. stroke; there were 192 boiler tubes of I¾ in. diameter, the working
pressure was 130 lb. The grate area remained at 16.4 sq. ft., though the
wheelbase was six inches longer than on the 7 ft. 0 in. singles of
1868.

No. 92 was thoroughly rebuilt (with new wheels) in 1883 and was not
withdrawn until October 1902. On p. 60 Groves notes that "C.E. Strettton
surmised that" No. 92 also incorporated the old cylinders from No. 215, but
the general arrangement drawings appear to show exactly the same design of
cylinders as on the 7ft 0in singles. See also 7ft 6in singles
Nos. 238 and 232.

No. 6 classBased on Sturrock 229 class, but devoid of the complications. Shared
same cylinders, boilers and motion of 280 series
of 2-4-0. Built Doncaster 1868-1870. On p. 59 described as "very useful
machines".
In June 1900 classification the straightback boiler type became class B5
and the domed rebuilds class B7.
Some rebuilt with Stirling improved boiler as per the 2-4-0s: the 206 tubes
were reduced to 192 and then to 176.Illustration: No. 14 illustrated at Lincoln on 4 August 1902:
Rly Arch., 2008 (18) 32:
according to Armin who wrote notes also in Groves 2 (but reproduction quality
better in Rly Arch.)

0-4-2 mixed traffic tender enginesGroves 2 116-39: Built for hauling fast freight, such as cotton
and wool. Ahrons was impressed by their performance on the severe gradients
in the West Riding: total 154 of this type..

Work until withdrawalPage 132 et seq: Mixed traffic engines, including fast freight. From
1898 until formation of MGNJR in 1893 worked between Spalding and Sutton
Bridge and from Stamford to Spalding via Essendine and Bourne. Page 133 Kenneth
Leech noted the class's "fire throwing propensity" especially on the climb
to Potters Bar. Page 136: At the beginning of 1921, no fewer than thirty-two
Stirling 0-4-2's remained in service. The high proportion allocated to the
three Lincolnshire sheds is notable. Light duties abounded in those places
and it is interesting to record that one of the last survivors, No. 958,
which had been in the Lincoln District for many years, spent its final days
at Louth. From this small outpost No. 958 was subshedded at Mablethorpe,
where accommodation for just one engine was provided. The day's work commenced
at 8.00 a.m. taking empty coaches to Sutton-on-Sea to form the 8.35 a.m.
passenger train to Louth, followed by a trip to Sutton, back to Mablethorpe
and then to Louth again. Next was a goods through from Louth to Willoughby
before the final trip with the 4.45 p.m. passenger train to Mablethorpe.
By the summer of 1921 all had been withdrawn and this valedictory comment,
quoted from contemporary observer Kenneth Leech, aptly sums up their useful
versatility: "...in my view the Stirling 0-4-2's were really marvellous little
engines, seeming almost to forget their limited adhesion weight when used
on goods trains and their small driving wheels when on passenger work. They
really were Stirling's "maids-of-all-work" and well earned their keep" .
Which, to a type of engine such as the 0-4-2 mixed traffics, is as fitting
a tribute as any.

Eames Duplex vacuum brake locomotive Lovett
EamesBraking system developed by Frederick W. Eames and evaluated on both
GNR and LYR. Trials took place on Barnby Don branch with a 1:20 gradient
Gr 140-3. Locomotive built by Baldwin Locomotive Works for Philadelphia &
Reading Railroad, but this was in receivership and on Bladwin's hands. Locomotive
was re-assembled at Newton Heath for trials on LYR and GNR, but Stirling
vetoed plans for it to run on GNR. In 1882 it was exhibited at Alexandra
Palace. Broken up 1884.

Nos. 238 and 232Based on No. 92 which used wheels from Sturrock
4-2-2. Built in 1885 and withdrawn in 1908 and 1906. Originally used between
Leeds and Doncaster but ended on light duties at York and Lincoln. Groves
2 pp.144-7.

Groves notes that the "necessity for using inside cranked axles was
the main drawback, as the webs often cracked or completely broke under working
condition stresses. Earlier engines had usually been provided with double
frames and generous bearings as a precaution, as some engineering opinions
held that they give safe support for the crank axle in the event of breakage.
All the foregoing too, of course, had been experienced on the G.N.R., where,
in addition, Sturrock's method of shrinking hoops round each crank axle web
in order to relieve stresses was employed. Latterly, Sturrock had also taken
an interest in using cast steel in place of wrought-iron in his locomotive
work, and Stirling - ever plagued by crank-axle failures (Brown p. 153 noted
that in 1872 had reported "every crank axle will break sooner or later. The
average number broken on the G.N.R. during the last five years has been 82
per annum, none of which has caused an accident.")  had experimented
for some years with crank axles of steel, but owing to its brittle qualities
had not achieved much success. However, by the early 1880's, steel plates
of high tensile strength had been developed and the technique in manufacture
had reduced the price below that of wrought-iron, so that crank axles were
now not only more reliable than ever, but also rendered less costly.

Groves also noted that "The introduction of No. 92 in 1870 had proved
a success and validates Bird's statement in that it "led eventually to the
building of a number of still more powerful engines of a similar general
design"".

The class took part in both the 1888 and 1895 races. (Groves (2) page
156). In June and August 1891 No. 240 was tested against 4-2-2 No. 1 and
NER compound 4-2-2 No. 1519. The trial route was
Doncaster-Leeds-Peterborough-Doncaster. Coal consumption was 30.6; 31.1 and
36.4 lb/mile respectively. One member of the class achieved 86.5 mile/h and
they tended to be used on light fast trains or were involved in double heading.
Last withdrawn at end of 1913.

8ft 1in 4-2-2 singlesThis class is generally perceived to be one of the masterpieces of
locomotive engineering and it is fortunate that No. 1 forms part of the National
Collection. Groves devotes a considerable amount of space
(160-216) to this class, but it should be noted that pp. 210-16 relate
to the preserved loocomotive and its forays into service during 1938 and
its prior exhibition at several locations.

The opening section of Groves is important
as this seminal design is linked to factors which led to it.

Stirling "claimed valid reasons for selecting a very large wheel diameter:
piston speed would be lower, and he subsequently explained "the larger the
wheel diameter the greater adhesion to the rail" and rebuffed suggestions
that a coupled design would have more adhesive power. Early in 1868, personal
steps were taken to prove to his satisfaction that sufficient adhesive power
was obtained with a Single. Stirling had been instructed to visit London
once a month to meet the Directorate and on return journeys he kept careful
observation of comparative workings of his 7ft. 0in. Singles and 6ft. 6in.
2-4-0's already in service. With trains of equal weight, the Singles generally
beat the coupled engines, especially on the uphill gradients between Kings
Cross and Potters Bar.

Having justified his predilection for single express engines, the
basic form for the projected design was drawn from the GSWR, where previously
he had produced three progressive series of inside-frame 2-2-2's with outside
cylinders. The final class had 7ft. 0in. diameter driving wheels and 3ft.
7in. carrying wheels; the last batch being completed by his brother James
Stirling in July 1868. These engines weighed 28 tons 9 cwt. 3qrs., with an
exceptional concentration of 15 tons on the driving axle. Stirling required
an engine to work fast trains up steep banks at high speed, calling for high
cylinder power and adequate adhesion, so chose a pattern based to an extent
on the final GSWR 2-2-2s.

The latter design was greatly enlarged to be capable of accommodating
a pair of driving wheels of 8ft. lin. diameter. To give ample power, he proposed
cylinders of l8in. diameter by 28in. stroke  the largest cylinders
hitherto used on any British passenger locomotive  requiring a long
crank axle throw of l4in. The decision to employ an eightfoot wheel ruled
out the consideration of inside cylinders, partly on account of the massive
leverage which side pressure on the flange of such a large wheel could exert
to flex the crank axle, especially one with a direct throw of l4in, But,
in a period when a low centre of gravity was still considered important,
that the boiler centre line would have had to be raised from the proposed
7ft. 1in. to the then unheard of figure of 7ft. 10½in. to clear the
cranks at top centres, was an overruling reason for the choice of outside
cylinders. The use of a large wheel also gave an advantage in obtaining
permission to use the greatest possible axle loading, which would, in any
event, be much less advisable to place on an inside crank axle.

The drawback of employing outside cylinders on fast express locomotives
having six wheels and comparatively short wheelbases, was a tendency towards
swaying or "nosing" from side to side at speed. Of this type, the well-known
"Lady of the Lake" class 7ft. 7½in. 2-2-2s on the LNWR introduced by
John Ramsbottom in November 1859 - though giving excellent main line service
- were a shining example of "nosing". In October 1862, Robert Sinclair of
the Great Eastern Railway had produced a 2-2-2 class (with outside frames
for the leading and trailing wheels) which not only performed satisfactory
work, but are recorded as being much steadier riding than many contemporaneous
outside cylinder engines on other lines.

At this embryo stage, the projected 8-foot design was certainly in
the form of an outside cylinder, inside-frame 2-2-2, and was to be larger
and more powerful than any earlier examples of the type as Stirling was aware
of their drawback. No records exist to show whether any preliminary sketches
or further proposals were made with regard to the design as it stood; therefore
the attitude relative to the carriage of the proposed engine is unknown,
and he was most certainly not prepared to build one for trial. Here a dilemma
arose. Although a front bogie would ensure a steady engine, Stirling had
a strong aversion to bogies, while at the same time, even to make an exception
on a large new engine estimated to be more expensive to build than his previous
types, a bogie would simply add to the cost.

It is known that during 1868 Stirling approached S.W. Johnson of the
G.E.R. and  in view of the above  it is probably no coincidence
that he asked for permission to borrow a Sinclair 2-2-2 Single. According
to the late K.A.C. Nunn, this was for the purpose of testing the merits of
an outside cylinder engine having large diameter driving wheels and a pair
of leading and trailing wheels within a short wheelbase, on the G.N.R. main
line. The engine borrowed was No. 293, one of the Kitson-built series of
August 1865, which had 7ft. 1in. diameter driving and 3ft. 7in. carrying
wheels. From the end of August 1868, trials lasting some weeks were conducted
in comparison with the Stirling and Sturrock 7ft. 0in. Singles on express
trains between Peterborough and London in charge of G.N. driver Lloyd. No
official reason for these trial runs was ever published as, apart from those
involved on the footplate, they were undoubtedly regarded as of no concern
to anyone outside Doncaster.

Although the actual performance of the Sinclair engine is not known,
its running in comparison with inside cylinder engines of similar size, though
of rather longer wheelbase, evidently proved at length its inferior riding
qualities to those of the G.N. engines.

However, the Sinclair Single had slightly inclined outside cylinders,
and may have momentarily suggested the idea of placing a suitable pair of
leading wheels further forward and directly under inclined outside cylinders
for the projected 8-foot design, thereby gaining a slightly longer wheelbase
and avoiding the use of a bogie. No official evidence can be found in reference
to this point, but Bird may well have unwittingly stumbled on the truth in
stating "Stirling decided to lay the cylinders in a horizontal line with
the driving wheel centres, to obviate the disadvantages of inclined outside
cylinders. This position, with the great overhang that it caused, would have
unduly loaded a single axle at the leading end". Thus, as a result of the
1868 trials, Stirling was compelled to adopt a bogie with the cylinders placed
between the two pairs of leading wheels for his 8-foot design, if the highest
speeds were to be attained with safety in regard to the riding quality of
the locomotive.

The careful steps taken to settle the form of the 8-foot Single had
been conducted whilst relaying of the main line with steel rails conveniently
neared completion. Stirling, also in charge of the Running Department, was
aware there was no particular necessity at the time to introduce a big engine
and certainly never any encouragement from the Board to design engines against
possible future requirements, therefore preparation of details was not
immediately proceeded with. Concurrently, the Drawing Office had been put
to work on an inside-frame version of Sturrock's suburban 0-4-2T and on
development of a suitable 0-6-0ST, so at the close of 1868 the whole range
of types to date would lay foundations for an efficient locomotive
stud.

From then onward, Stirling's reports to the Board frequently drew
attention to the cheap first cost and economical maintenance of his designs,
compared with those of Sturrock. This evidently won the directors' confidence
sufficiently to confirm Stirling's appointment as Locomotive Engineer by
the end of September 1869, thus ending the probationary phase.

Shortly afterwards - with his position clarified work on the new big
express design commenced. One of the first detail drawings, still in existence,
was for the bogie and another for the boiler, both dated December 1869. A
fresh drawing, T-39, for an 8ft. lin. diameter driving wheel was made in
January 1870 and the general arrangement for the 8-foot 4-2-2 Single was
dated March 1870. Owing to the use of 82 lb. double-headed steel rails on
the main line, the full weight on the driving axle was brought up to 15
tons.

The prototype engine, No.1, was completed at a cost of £2,033
and turned out on 20th April 1870 with specially selected works and running
numbers. Its Doncaster Works number 50 (49 and 51 were completed at the end
of June 1870) was two months ahead of its date; thus the "No.1" was not a
true replacement of Sharp Single No.1 of August 1847. The design clearly
showed its genesis in the final G.& S.W.R. 2-2-2 Singles but greatly
enlarged, equipped with a bogie and extremely beautifully proportioned. On
No.1  and all subsequent 8-foot Singles  the basic pattern of
a combination of an exceptionally large driving wheel with outside cylinders
formed the central eature of their external artistic excellence. Not only
larger items, but every detail of the design was harmonious and balanced,
except perhaps for the severe austerity of the cab.

As completed in 1870, certain details were unique to No.1 in comparison
with all succeeding engines; the most fundamental difference was a
shorter firebox with a corresponding shorter wheelbase, for after experience
with No.1 in service, it was found imperative to improve its steaming capacity.
This involved some design changes, the major one being the necessity of providing
future engines with a larger firebox, its length in turn, determining a longer
engine wheelbase to which No.1 was eventually altered to conform.

Towards the end of the year, Stirling was ready to build further engines
of the same general design in which known defects would be eliminated but
the complete success of this type was not achieved immediately. As experience
in service showed up weak points there were numerous changes made in some
major, but chiefly minor, design details for the next six years before gaining
temporary satisfaction. Finality was still not reached for further improvements
continued to be made throughout their twenty five year period of construction,
and it would indeed be surprisihg if this had not been the case! After completion
of No. 1, the 8-footers were built in pairs, so that whilst each pair were
often identical, other members of the class were merely "sister" engines,
as in many cases changes were instituted between the building of each successive
pair. In addition, there were often minor differences effected in bringing
them into line with prevailing Doncaster practice at any given date, i.e.
cast-iron wheel centres in place of wrought-iron, the closing of the earlier
slotted splashers, the later provision of slightly larger boilers: at no
time was the class standard throughout, although Groves notes that from No.
544 in 1877 some stability was reached and remained until the final 1894/5
batch Nos. 1003-1008 which were an enlarged version.

No. 1Groves (165-8) makes it very
clear that this was treated as a prototype and was the subject of many
modifications to improve its steaming including the replacement of the original
balanced slide valves.

Preserved No. 1Withdrawn from service on 23 September 1907 after 1,404,663 miles.
In 1908 No. 1 received a thorough overhaul and was partially reassembled
in 1870 condition, but with 1880 frames and larger boiler and modernn injectors.
Old tender off Hawthorn 0-4-2 of 1849. In April 1909 exhibited at Imperial
Internation Exhibition at Shepherds Bush. Then stored until transfer by LNER
to York Railway Museum. Steamed for Stockton & Darlington Centenary
procession. Overhauled and steamed in 1938 for fiftieth anniversary of 1888
races and new Flying Scotsman rolling stock and turned up in such
unlikely places as Norwich and Yarmouth, but most photographed at Stevenage
alongside new Flying Scotsman train. Even reached Edinburgh according
to Groves. Stored at Ferryhill (Durham) during WW2. Post WW2 followed fate
of NRM. Groves 2 pp. 210-15.

Johnson, E.M. 'The 'Flying Scotsman'1938 train and
celebrations. Backtrack, 2005, 19, 718-24.The fiftieth anniversary of the 1888 race to Edinburgh was used as
one of the elements in a major publicity drive to amrk the introduction of
new rolling stock for the Flying Scotsman train in 1938. To demonstrate the
advance of travelling comfort on the ECML a train of vintage six-wheelers
was prepared in East Coast Joint Stock livery and Stirling eight foot single
No. 1 was overhauled and used to haul it, initially on a train on 30 June
from King's Cross to Stevenage where the press and invited guests joined
the new train for a demonstration run. Johnson describes the new train at
some length, noting the pressure ventilation, the liberal use of Rexine,
the colours of the upholstery, the ladies' retiring room and the buffet car
additional to the normal restaurant car. Stock was provided for through carriages
to Glasgow, Perth and Aberdeen. Subsequently, No. 1 was briefly placed on
exhibition at Edinburgh, Newcastle and York and used on excursions from
Manchester (to Liverpool), and from Norwich to Yarmouth and Ipswich.

Originated with Nottingham & Grantham 2-4-0
rebuilt as 0-6-0ST in 1867. In May 1868 No. 372 No. 392 was rebuilt with
a straightback boiler and given a new Works Number (7). Sturrock Nos. 124
and 162 were also rebuilt with straightback boilers in 1868 and were allocated
Works Numbers 104/3). In addition four completely new locmotives were constructed
between 1871 and 1873. In May 1898 four 392 series boilers were ordered:
Nos. 1 and 2 were fitted to locomotives Nos. 124 and 167 in 1899, but boilers
3 and 4 (which had shorter fireboxes) are not quoted as being allocated until
after 1908. Locomotives with the long fireboxes were classified as J11, the
remainder as J12. Class withdrawn by 1910. Groves (2) pp. 263-4.

396 series4ft coupled wheels, 16 x 22 cyls straightback boilers saddle tanks
1869-
Originated in West Yorkshire Railway Manning Wardle 0-6-0Ts, including
replacements for WYR locomotives and may have retained their wheels for a
time. Further four built new in 1874. No. 470A (nominal rebuild) was converetd
to Holden system of oil firing and to 0-4-2ST configuration and used at Hall
Mills Creosote Works at Boston: became LNER 3470A and finally withdrawn in
April 1927. Remainder withdrawn by 1912. Groves (2) pp. 265-7.

605 seriesTwo locomotives built Doncaster 1875. Withdrawn in 1906 and 1918.
Groves 2 page 267. H.T.B. (Loco.
Mag., 1901, 6, 20) notes that these were fitted with short
chimneys for working traffic to docks: also called "4ft 1in saddle
tanks"..

684 series J18Built at Doncaster between 1882 and 1892. Known as J18 from 1900.
Total 8. Some reboilered by Ivatt and some by Gresley. Became LNER J57 regardless
of boiler type. Some reboilered with those from withdrawn J56 which in turn
had been carried by 0-4-4Ts of clases G3 and G1. Until 1900 essential for
passing under low bridge beneath GER mainline at Stratford to reach Royal
Mint Street, Poplar Dock and Thames Wharf. Last not withdrawn until 1938.
Groves 2 pp.268-73.

4ft 8in 0-6-0 saddle tanks

Groves (2) pp. 273-94: Table page 274 shows boiler types

494 series Doncaster 1874-6 Groves (2) pp. 276-7: Groves claims that Bird was incorrect to suggest
that this series ever had sloping backs to their bunkers or shorter chimneys.
Class J15 LNER J57

601A (withdrawn 1919) sold to John F. Wake of Darlington who resold
it to Wemyss Coal Co where it became No. 6; survived to be taken over by
NCB and cut up Wellesley Colliery in Fife in May 1956. Four to LNER.

606 series Doncaster 1876/7Groves (2) pp. 286-7: ten short wheelbase shorter firebox. Nos. 606
and 610 rebuilt in 1919 to form J16 (LNER J55). pp 287-94 cover later boiler
changes and withdrawn : some just made it into BR.

The only improvement originally planned in these engines was an increase
in the adhesion weight and steaming capacity, though after the first six
had been constructed with 17½in. diameter cylinders it appears that
18in. diameter ones were decided upon. Some official records have shown these
six with 18in. cylinders as built. Again, Bird quotes Nos. 921-30 as having
17½in. (as in the earlier saddle tank Series) and No. 961 onwards having
18in. diameter cylinders. This has proved impossible to confirm or disprove
to any degree of satisfaction. The original drawing for the frames quoted
17½in. cylinders but it cannot be ascertained whether the change in
design was actually effected before No. 921 appeared or at some date in 1893.
The contemporary records all show No. 921 onwards having 18in. cylinders,
except rather oddly in the case of Nos. 111 and 155, the last two to be built,
which are shown as having 17½in. cylinders. The cylinder pattern charts
do not admit of any of the Series having other than 18in. cylinders, yet
elsewhere No. 922, for example, is quoted as having 17½ diameter cylinders
in December 1923.

Checkley, Sid. Shunting engines at Colwick. .
inHughes, Geoffrey.
A Gresley anthology. Didcot: Wild Swan/Gresley Society, 1994.
pp. 87-8.See also feature on maintenance of other locomotives at Colwick
(above). The J52 saddle tanks suffered from blowing joints
through the piston glands and cylinder covers. Two types of packing were
used: graphite impregnated hemp and metal where the edges could be as sharp
as razor blades. The coil springs on the trailing axle could fall out when
remetalling the axleboxes. Removal of the saddle tank involved an apprentice
climing through the filler hole which was a tight squeeze and possibly finding
the tank not to be completely empty. Some had wooden buffer beams until
withdrawn. The removal of the weight bar spring (coil-type) on the bridle
rod, part of the reversing gear was difficult and reassembly even more so.
The N5 class was not popular for shunting due to having vacuum brakes. Illus.:
J52 4252; 68877 at Grantham c1952 (John F. Clay); 68875 at Colwick in July
1958; N5 69309 on freight at Louth in 1950s (JFC).

0-4-4CT 1905No. 533 was rebuilt as a crane tank for Doncaster Works. It was condemned
in November 1928. Groves (2) 83-4. also RCTS Locomotives of the LNER
Part 10A p. 28-9 which note that from 1925 it carried a C12 type
boiler.

629 class (G5 class) 5ft 0in 0-4-4 back tanks. Groves (2) 87-9.
Two built in 1880, rebuilt in 1898/1900 and withdrawn 1909 and 1918. Intended
for Essendine to Stamford line, but sent to Yorkshire. No. 630 worked Stamford
and Wansford branches in 1915/1917.

658 class (G3, G4)5ft 0in 0-4-4T: sixteen constructed 1881-5. Six fitted with short
chimneys and condensing apparatus: remainder sent to West Riding. Ivatt
rebuilt six with large domed-boilers and eight with domed boilers of original
diameter. All withdrawn by 1926. Obvious error p. 92 Second World War when
WW1 was intended, Groves (2) pp. 90-5.

126 class 5ft 7in 0-4-2WT built Doncaster 1868-1871. Counterpart of Sturrock
ouside frame 0-4-2Ts. Total: 13. Groves (2) pp.
63-73. Goslin (p. 11) noted the wide gap of 13 feet between THE driving
and trailing axles, which enabled a large firebox and well tank to be fitted.
Reboilered 1884-9. In 1898 ten domed boilers were ordered, but only five
fitted as class withdrawn from 1905 (last survivor 1918). First two (Nos.
126 and 127) sent to West Riding. remainder fitted with condensing apparatus
and used in London area, including on cross-London freight. Classified as
F6. Goslin, Geoff. Steam on the Widened
Lines. Volume 1: The Great Northern and Midland Railways and their
successors. 1997 (No. 12 is shown on page 7)..

Stafford & Uttoxeter Railway Groves
2 113-115.Authorised 29 July 1862, opened 23 December 1867, purchased GNR 1
August 1881. Complete history of line until closure in March 1951, although
line remained extant for further six years.
Fig. 97 Shrewsbury and Talbot: Beyer Peacock 1868 2-4-0T
Fig. 98 Ingestre 0-4-2ST rebuilt from NLR No. 41 (Beyer 1868): see
Loco. Rly Carr. Wagon Rev, 1943, p. 73: passed via J.H. Johnson of
Wigan and Manager of Strangeways (Hindley) and Birkenshaw Collieries. They
became GNR No. 682 which was quickly broken up and 683A which was relaced
in 1882.

Detail

Cabs

Groves (2) pp. 45-6 states that the Stirling cab originated with
Stirling's sister: she had noted the men's suffering in harsh weather and
designed a model cab with a strip of cardboard: via R.H.
Whitelegg.

BrakesOn page 197 of Brown (1) there is a comment that notes that:
"Chain brakes are to be taken off the twelve carriages so fitted as they
go through the shops": the source was dated 9 August 1878.

Stamford & Essendine Railway Essentially the Marquess of Exeter's own railway, but tended to be
worked by GNR. Groves (2) describes the railway and its assorted motive power
on pp. 106-9. The line opened on 1 November 1856. A lightly constructed bridge
over River Welland affected the choice of locomotive. It was worked by GNR
until January 1865 using two ex-Nottingham & Grantham Railway ex-dummy
crankshaft locomotives as 0-4-2STs. From 1 January 1872 worked by GNR again.
S&ER No. 1 (GNR 501) was a Fairbairn 0-4-2T with a long history: it had
been acquired from the LNWR, but had originated on the Liverpool Crosby &
Souithport Railway as a 2-4-0T; it then passed to the L&YR and thence
to George Thompson, contractor on the Birkenhead, Lancashire & Cheshire
Railway and becoming No. 34 on that railway before passing to the LNWR as
No. 34 Phoebus. No. 2 Exeter was Manning Wardle 157/1865: it
became GNR 502. No. 3 was R. & W. Hawthorn 1424/1867: it became GNR No.
503.